sts&L, 


^ 


n 

1 

1 


alt' 

-.■-;'■ 


IDRESS 


zJ&fki  ■ 


K> 


JOHN  RANDOLPH  TUCKER,  ESQ. 


DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE 


m  anb 


aikatt  Societies,  1 


WILLIAM  AND  MARY  COLLEGE, 


Oil    the    3d    of    July,    1854,. 


PUBLISHED   AT   THE    REQUEST  OF  THE    TWO   SOCIETIES. 


RICHMOND: 

CHAS.    H.    WYNNE,    PRINTER. 
1854. 


i  s=gM, 
1  - 


gg&sr^i 


r: 


3 


M?1 


^ 


J  JP 


In//*  TfcZ  tyc^h 


IsPXs 


L 


AD] 


DRESS 


JOHN  RANDOLPH  TUCKER,  ESQ.    , 


DELIVERED  KEFOKE  THE 


PHLEIiX  AID  PH1L0MATHEAN  SOCIETIES. 

OF 

WILLIAM  AND  MARY  COLLEGE, 

On    the    3d    of    July,    1854. 

PUBLISHED   AT   THE   REQUEST   OF   THE   TWO    SOCIETIES. 


RICHMOND: 

CHAS.    H.    1TYXXE,    PRINTER. 

1854. 


I 


ADDRESS 


Gentlemen  of  the  Phoenix  and  Philomathean  Societies: 

The  circumstances  which  have  concurred  to  call  me  to  address  you, 

I  will  be  ever  regarded  as  among  the  most  pleasant  of  my  life.     Among 

them  I  shall  highly  cherish  the  unexpected  partiality  which  suggested 

your  invitation,  and  the  courtesy  which  has  marked  my  reception 

among  you. 

Few  places  in  the  world  have  for  me  a  deeper  personal  interest 
than  this.     Amid  the  greetings  of  kindly  welcome,  I  have  missed 
the  warm  cordiality  of  one  whose  devotion  to  its  prospective  advance- 
ment  was  only  ecpialled  by  his  intense  veneration  for  its  former   ) 
renown ;  and  while  it  is  with  natural  sadness  I  recur  to  associations    ) 
which  are  past  forever,  it  affords  me  high  gratification  to  visit  Wil-   j 
liamsburg  as  the  home,  and  this  literary  institution  as  the  school  of  a 
generation  of  my  own  family,  whose  names  are  embalmed  in   the   ) 
memory  of  its  descendants.  ) 

But  my  feelings  as  a  citizen  of  Virginia,  in  looking  upon  the  \ 
scenes  which,  with  the  lapse  of  time,  cluster  iu  classic  beauty  about  I 
the  venerable  edifices  and  ruins  of  this  old  borough,  make  it  to  me  a 
spot  sacred  to  the  sentiment  of  patriotism.  We  stand  in  the  ancient 
Capital  of  the  Colony  of  the  Old  Dominion.  There,  were  those 
mouldering  heaps,  where  standing  walls  once  heard  the  indignant  cry 
of  Henry's  patriot  voice,  awakening  a  continent  to  revolution,  and 
its  colonies  to  independence.  There  stands  iu  its  rude  and  mis- 
shapen— but  to  us  interesting  plainness,  the  "Old  Raleigh,"  where 
power  heard  its  noblest  lesson  of  submission  to  the  demands  of  liberal 
principles.  Here,  in  fine,  is  the  cradle  in  which  was  rocked  the 
Colony  of  Virginia,  whose  giant  energy  stifled  the  vipers  who  threat- 
ened its  ruin,  and  whose  augmenting  glories  and  increasing  power 


a 


(4  ADDRESS. 

{ 

;.  have  aroused  the  envy  of  its  enemies,  the  admiration  of  its  generous 
rivals,  and  the  deep  and  ever  deepening  devotion  of  its  true-hearted 

■  people. 

I  perhaps  owe  you  an  apology  for  not  searching  amid  the  colonial 

1  records  for  reminiscences  of  that  "  Olden  Time,"  whose  life  was  here. 
But  I  am  aware  that  in  this  country,  while  the  work  of  the  antiquary 

<  excites  a  passing  interest,  and  mere  literary  discussion  affords  enter- 

'  tainment  to  the  Cjuiet  and  secluded  few — the  questions  which  take  the  j 
deepest  hold  upon  the  American,  and  especially  upon  the  Southern  ( 
mind,  are  those  which  concern  the  relations  of  man  to  society,  and  of  \ 
the  citizen  to  his  government. 

I  may  claim,  in  the  opinion  of  some,  too  much  for  my  State,  hut  5 
:.  not  more  than  impartial  history  must  award  to  her,  when  I  assert   j 
'  that  the  political  men  of  Virginia  were  the  guides  of  the  States  of  \ 
the  Union  in  the  early  days  of  their  independence.     Th™  great  Vir- 
ginian Idea  was  the  American  Idea  :  and  covered  up,  as  it  may  some-   ) 
times  have  been  in  a  confusion  of  words,  and  concealed  by  the  absence   { 
\  of  the  clearer    light,   which    later   investigation  has  more   fully   de- 
,  veloped,  it  still  stands  forth  prominently  in  our  early  annals,  easy   j 
of  determination,  and  the  germ  of  all  political  truth. 

Much  misapprehension  exists  upon  this  subject.     It  arises,  I  think,   ; 
'  from  confounding  the  mere  form  of  the  political  organization  with 

<  the  object  to  be  etrtained  by  it. 

Thus  with  many,  the  fundamental  idea  of  American  Republicanism 

}  consists  in  the  power  of'the  people— the  Democratic  Idea.     "With 

1  others  who  look  a  little  deeper,  our  system  claims  universal  assent, 

(  because  of-  its  combination  of  the  Representative  with  the  Democratic 

I  feature.     "With  others  asain,  its  wisdom  is  most    manifested  in  its 

)  ,  .  .  . 

J  strict   and   admirable  division  of  the  powers  of  the  government   be- 

'  tween  co-ordinate  branches,  each  checking  the  action  of  the  other. 
J  And  still  another  class  of  more  accurate  thinkers,  gathering  in  one 
/  the  several  views  already  suggested,  and  superadding  the  Federative 
principle,  enthusiastically  commend  our  institutions  as  the  most  per- 
fect, because  they  constitute  us  a  Federative  Republican  Democracy. 

Now  each  one  of  these  views  contains  principles  of  vital  importance, 
and  deserves  the  hisrh   estimation    in   which  it  is   held.     But  it   is 


i 


ADDRESS.  O 

obvious  they  do  not  involve  the  essential  purpose  and  end  of  all 
government.  They  constitute  the  various  means  by  which  some  end 
may  be  attained,  but  are  not  themselves  that  ultimate  purpose. 
Their  value  must  and  can  only  be  determined  by  considering  their 
adaptation  to  carry  out  the  true  and  legitimate  end  of  government — 
the  happiness  of  the  people. 

It  is  the  too  exclusive  regard  to  these  important  means,  which  has 
led  to  the  dangerous,  though  popular  heresy,  that  the  virtue  of  our 
institutions  is  to  be  found  in  the  scape  they  afford  to  popular  power, 
and  not  in  the  security  they  give  to  popular  liberty.  The  sovereignty 
of  the  people  has  been  so  long  rung  in  their  (not  unwilling)  ears  by 
the  politicians  of  the  country,  that  it  is  construed  as  if  it  were  the 
absolutism — the  unlimited  omnipotence  of  the  people.  Nor  does  the 
word  "people,"  used  in  this  connection,  have  any  other  than  that 
consolidated  sense,  in  which  it  is  viewed  as  one  being,  not  as  a  col- 
lection of  distinct  individuals.  Thus  it  is  that  the  man  is  merged 
in  the  mass.  { 

All  this,  to  my  mind,  is  fundamental  error,  and  can  only  be  cor-  ) 
rected  by  a  deeper  view  of  sosiety,  and  of  government  the  represen-  ) 
tative  of  its  power. 

The  Kepublican — the  Virginian  Idea  is  this  :  Every  man  is  a  ( 
Sovereign.  Society  is  a  league,  based  upon  compact,  actual  or  sup-  ) 
posed,  between  individuals.     Government  is  their  joTWt  agent.  )    (Vft 

This  view  throws  man  upon  his  true  dignity,  because  it  involves  ( 
his  rightful  and  unavoidable  responsibility  as  such  to  his  Creator. 

Adam  was  first  created.  Hulhan  Government  was  then  divinely 
instituted.  Man,  as  to  his  fellows,  was  therefore  sovereign,  before 
government  existed. 

Nor  is  this  relative  order  of  the  two  in  any  degree  changed  by 
disregarding  the  revealed  history  of  the  creation  of  the  one,  and  the 
subsequent  institution  of  the  other.  For,  as  men  are  created  distinct 
in  the  faculties  and  powers  of  their  being,  and  unquestionably  so  as 
to  their  will,  it  is  obvious  that  Government  which  results  from  the 
co-operation  of  the  individuals  of  society  must  have  succeeded,  and 
could  not  have  preceded  the  unrestrained  will  of  the  individual  man. 
Hence,  whatever  the  rude  social  form,  or  the  character  of  government 


| 


990124 


b  ADDRESS. 

ill  its  origin  among  our  species,  it  must  have  sprung  from  an  original 
express  or  tacit  assent ;  and  in  political  science  may  be  considered  as 
deriving  all  its  validity  from  the  terms  of  a  supposed  compact  be- 
tween men.     Here  then  is  the  starting  point  of  our  enquiry. 

Now  what  is  the  precedent  right  of  the  man  who  thus  enters  into 
this  compact  ?  It  is  a  right  to  use  all  of  his  powers,  subject  to  his 
own  exclusive  control,  and  responsible  therefor  only  to  Him  by 
whom  the}-  were  bestowed.  Such  would  be  the  anti-social,  or  what 
is  sometimes  called  the  natural  condition  of  man.     This  is  natural 

J  liberty ;  a  term  for  which  I  shall  substitute  another,  the  liberty  of 
isolation. 

What  is  social  or  civil  liberty  ?  and  wherein  does  it  differ  from  this 
liberty  of  isolation  1 

In  order  to    facilitate    these    enquiries,  permit   me    to  ask,  why 

)  does  man  enter  society  at  all,  supposing  him  ever  to  have  been  out  of 
it  ?  Why  does  he  place  himself  under,  and  subject  his  otherwise  free 
action  to,  the  control  of  government  ?  Does  he  love  to  be  controlled  ? 
Does  he  hate  to  be  free  ?  Would  he  prefer  being  guided  by  another's 
will,  to  being  directed  by  his  own  ?     Is  this  human  nature  ? 

I  answer,  it  is  the  fear  of  the  loss  of  his  rights,  which  has  driven 
man  from  primeval  isolation  into  society.  It  is  the  love  of  liberty, 
the  gift  of  God,  which  he  feels  in  every  fibre  of  his  frame,  in  every 
warm  throb  of  his  heart,  in  every  breath  he  draws,  in  every  aspira- 
tion of  his  sold,  in  every  energy  of  his  untrammelled  intellect ;  it  is 
this  love  of  the  liberty  which  God  has  bestowed  upon  him,  which 
impels  him  to  seek  its  security,  its  .protection,  in  the  shield  of  the 

.,  government,  which  the  social  compact  creates. 

Does  the  sBcial  compact  then  bind  man  to  give  up  a  portion  of  his 

\  liberty,  to  surrender  any  of  his  rights,  in  order  to  secure  the  residue  ? 

(  Does  he,  like  some  humble  petitioner  in  bankruptcy,  compound  for  a 
part  of  his  right,  by  submitting  to  the  confiscation  of  the  balance  ?  i 

)  By  no  means.  The  nature  of  his  liberty  and  of  his  rights  are 
different  in  his  condition  of  isolation  and  of  society.     But  he  surrcn- 

i  ders  none  of  those  which  result  to  him  in  the  latter,  by  virtue  of  the 

}  social  compart.  He  retains  all  he  could  possess  in  a  social  condition. 
He  does  not  lose  anything  under  the  social  compact.     The  idea  that 


) 


ADDRESS.  I 

he  does,  arises  from  not  adverting  to  the  palpable  distinction  between 
the  exclusive  rights  of  a  perfectly  isolated  being,  and  the  modified 
rights  of  a  social  being.  Robinson  Crusoe  might  well  in  his  gloomy 
solitude  claim  to  be  monarch  of  all  he  surveyed;  but  without  any 
assent  on  his  part,  or  compact  with  others,  or  even  social  intercourse, 
he  would  not  have  been  without  a  valid  disputant  of  his  asserted 
right,  had  his  island  home  been  peopled  by  others,  whose  wants 
demanded  a  participation  in  its  fruits.  Thus  his  exclusive  rights, 
the  result  of  isolation,  would  be  modified  and  abridged  by  the 
presence  of  those,  whose  rights  would  be  as  unlimited  as  his  own. 
The  rights  of  each  would  thus  bo  qualified  in  such  a  way,  as  to  deny 
the  exclusiveness  of  any,  and  to  admit  the  participation  of  all ;  and 
it  would  become  the  duty  of  each  so  to  admit  the  right  of  the  others, 
and  so  to  qualify  his  own. 

Social  or  civil  liberty  therefore  is  essentially  different  from,  and 
much  less  unlimited  than  the  liberty  of  isolation ;  not  as  the  result 
of  any  compact,  but  of  the  just  and  natural  difference  between  the 
exclusive  rights  of  personal  isolation,  and  the  modified  rights  which 
result  from  the  presence  of  rival,  and  equally  valid  claims  to  the 
same  exclusiveness  of  right. 

When,  therefore,  man  enters  into  the  socicd  compact,  he  does  so  to  5 
secure  all  of  his  rights  and  all  of  his  liberty  which  do  not  conflict 
with  the  rights  and  liberty  of  those  with  whom  he  is  united  in  social 
intercourse.     They  all  unite  to  preserve  the    social  rights  of  each 
from  violation.     The  obligation  of  the  social  compact  is  only  to  do,  } 
what  without  it,  as  we  have  shown,  it  is  the  duty  of  each  to  do —  ; 
sic  iitere  tuo  ut  non  alienum  leedijs.     This  is  the  language  of  the   j  ^L- 
^  agreement.     Each  binds  himself  by  it,  as  a  sovereign  to  his  co-sove-  * 
reigns ;  and  society  becomes  a  great  mutual  insurance  of  liberty  to 
all;  and  to  all  because  to  each. 

If  these  views  be  correct,  how  fallacious  is  that  doctrine  to  which 
I  have  adverted,  that  a  man  under  free  institutions  must  surrender  a 
portion  of  his  liberty  in  order  to  secure  the  residue  !  And  how  mon- 
strous that  other  odious  notion,  which  is  the  superlative  of  good  with 
some  political  thinkers,  that  the  highest  purpose  of  government  is  to 
attain  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number  !     A  doctrine  which, 


ADDRESS. 


not  content  with  making  each  man  purchase  a  remnant  of.  his  right,  j 

,  by  the  tame  surrender  of  a  part,  demands  that  a  portion  of  society  ? 

shall,  if  need  be,  give  up  all,  in  order  to  fill  the  cup  of.  good  to  the  ) 

greatest  number  to  overflowing !     Yrhence  is  this  prerogative  of  society  ( 

;  derived  ?     TVhere  does  it  obtain  the  power  to  shuffle  my  rights  with  ! 

j  yours,  and  advertising  the  grand  drawing  of  the  government  lottery,  ) 

j  by  which  you  secure  rights,  and  I  endure  wrongs!     Jlan  would  have  > 

no  rights,  according  to  this  theory,  but  those  he  can  win  at  a  raffle  !  i 

It  will  be  observed,  that  in  the  discussion  already  indulged,  I  have  , 
regarded  personal  isolation  as  a  hypothetical  condition,  from  which 
logical  deductions  may  properly  be  drawn,  and  the  social  condition  as 
man's  necessity.     In  the  former  the  race  would  perish;  in  the  latter 

:  only  can  it  exist.  ) 

Hence,  in  the  history  of  the  race,  the  liberty  of  isolation  is  an  \ 

y  exception,  which  fortunately  has  had  its  only  type  in  the  partially  J 

;  fabulous  life  of  Crusoe  ;  while  social  or  civil  liberty  is  that  only  to  j 
\  which  man,  as  a  permanent  occupant  of  the  earth,  can  aspire. 

Civil  liberty  is  that  which  marks  the  condition  of  the  individuals  ) 
:  of  a  society,  where  their  social  rights — those  modified  rights  oflfchich 

J  I  have  spoken— are  respected  and  protected.      These  are   the  highest  * 

;  rights  of  man,  as  a  social  being*     To  preserve  them  in  their  entirety,  j 

i  he  enters  into  the  social  pact,  and  adheres  to  it.     He  does  not  do  so  ) 

in  order  to  acquire  rights,  or  to  obtain  privileges  at  its  hands.     He  ( 
comes  into  the  social  bond  to  preserve  what  he  has,  what  is  his  own ; 
and  he  invests  society  with  power  to  accomplish  that  purpose. 

This  idea,  that  a  man  derives  anv  rights,  or  can  look  for  anv,  from  ) 

government,  is   an   exotic,  reared  in  the   hot-houses   of  monarchical  > 
systems.     Nbn   det,  qui  -non    halet.     It   assumes  that  man   has   no 

rights  but  those  he  derives  from  his  government;  whereas,  as  has  } 

been  shewn,  government,  the  growth  of  social  existence,  has  no  power  *> 

but  such  as  it  obtains  from  the  man.     Man  gives  it  nothing,  but  the  ! 

power  of  himself  and  his  co-pactors  to  maintain  the  rights  which  each  ( 
had  antecedent  to  its  existence,  and  brings  with  him  into  society. 


*  And  as  man,  as  a  social  being,  has  higher  opportunity  for  development,  than 
when  isolated,  it  follows  that  these  ''highest  rights  of  man,  as  a  social  being,"  are 
the  highest  of  which  his  nature  is  susceptible. 


ADDRESS 


The  compact,  as  already  remarked,  is  one  of  mutual  assurance,  and 
government  is  but  the  general  agent  to  enforce  it  against  all. 

There  are  some  important  corollaries,  which  flow  from  these  simple, 
but  fundamental  truths. 

Does  civil  liberty,  as  defined,  involve  socialism  ?  or  demand  the 
equalization  of  the  condition  of  the  members  of  society  ? 

I  answer,  agrarianisrn  has  no  hope  from  the  view  presented ;  and 
socialism  is  destroyed  by  it. 

It  involves  a  parity  of  right  in  the  members  of  society — an  abso- 
luteness of  right  in  each  as  to  his  own  powers ;  but  it  utterly  excludes 
any  idea  of  participation  by  others  in  those  of  each.  Each  is  his 
own  master.  God  has  given  to  each  his  own  talent.  Its  use  is  guar- 
antied to  him  by  its  Giver,  and  for  it  the  receiver  alone  is  responsible. 
He  becomes  a  party  to  the  social  compact,  in  order  to  protect  himself 
in  this  exclusive  use  of  what  is  his  own. 

Now  it  is  obvious,  as  all  are  not  alike  in  capacity,  and  as  there 
exists  the  greatest  difference  in  faculty,  mental,  jmoral  and  physical, 
true  equality  of  right  in  each  to  what  is  his  own,  must  result  in 
inequalitv,  and  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  an  equality  of  condition 
among  individuals.  In  other  words,  so  far  from  agrarianism  resulting 
from  the  postulate  of  an  equality  of  right,  it  is  the  greatest  inequality 
of  right  to  enforce  an  equality  of  condition. 

It  is  likewise  obvious,  that  as  this  equality  of  right  in  men  involves 
the  exclusive  use  of  all  that  is  his  own,  the  socialist  idea  of  huddling 
all  in  a  common  mass,  and  making  one  machine  of  the  many  separate 
organisms — thus  forcing  the  gifted  to  divide  with  the  impoverished, 
the  strong  with  the  weak,  the  laborer  with  the  drone — is  as  incon- 
sistent with  the  principles  of  civii  liberty,  as  it  is  repugnant  to 
common  honesty,  and  opposed  to  the  revealed  will  of  God. 

As  to  both  of  these  miserable  excrescences  of  a  pseudo-Democracy, 
spawns  of  the  free-labor  Democracies  of  the  world,  which  perish  in 
the  Democratic  Republics  of  the  South,  as  the  toad  away  from  the 
miasmas  of  his  cess-pool,  they  are  condemned  by  reason  and  revela- 
tion. The  latter  declares  that  each  shall  bear  his  own  burthen  ;  and 
He  who  spake  in  parables,  illustrative  of  all  truth,  because  they  were 
so  of  his  spiritual  teachings,  has  told  us,  that  the  wise   and  thrifty 


10  ADDRESS 


virgins,  whose  lamps  were  filled,  trimmed  and  burning,  should  reap 
the  reward  of  the  performance  of  duty ;  while  the  unthinking  five 
should  suffer  the  penalty  of  their  own  neglect,  with  no  claim  upon 
their  wiser  companions,  under  the  laws  of  the  modern  socialist  or 
agrarian. 

The  true  corollary  is,  that  as  each  has  separate  gifts  from  his 
Creator,  and  comes  into  the  social  compact  to  preserve  them,  equality 
of  right  demands  that  each  be  left  to  work  out  his  own  destiny,  freely 
and  manfully — to  accomplish  all  which  by  nature  he  is  fitted  to  acconi- 
\  plish,  without  hindrance  from  his  fellows,  and  without  help  or  inter- 
ference from  his  government.  The  world  the  arena,  man  the  athlete, 
government  the  mere  police,  God  the  arbiter,  and  the  reward  the 
laurel  he  can  gather,  and  the  crown  he  can  win. 

There  is  a  still  further  and  most  important  view.  I  have  said  that 
man's  social  rights  are  the  rights  of  isolated  man,  controlled  and 
modified  by  the  like  rights  of  his  associates.  The  extent  of  this 
abridgment  will  of  course  depend  upon  the  claims  and  the  necessities 
of  the  latter.  If  each  cannot  have  all  the  rights  he  might  have  as  a 
solitary  being,  he  must  have  all  which  is  consistent  with  the  existence 
of  the  highest  practicable  rights  in  others.  If  there  be  conflict,  it 
must  be  reconciled  by  such  a  compromise  as  will  attain  the  best 
development,  the  highest  happiness  and  well-being  of  all.  Neither 
part  must  seek  for  itself  a  greater  elevation,  by  the  deeper  depression 
of  the  other;  but  each  must  so  adjust  itself  to  a  social  equilibrium, 
that  the  maximum  elevation  for  each  shall  be  attained,  and  the  mini- 
mum depression  of  each  avoided. 

Thus,  where  two  conflicting  interests  are  combined  in  a  society, 

civil  liberty  will  consist  in  the  preservation  of  that  equilibrium,  where 

the  social  rights  of  each  so  modify  those  of  the  other,  as  to  preserve 

to  each  the  greatest  amount  of  right  and  freedom  consistent  with  their 

\  co-existence   in   social   combination.      In  this   there   may   be   what  J 

\  appears  to  be  an  abridgment  of  liberty ;  but  it  is  the  abridgment  of  ) 

}  the  liberty  of  isolation.     It  is  not  an  abridgment  of  social  or  civil   ) 

\  liberty,  because  it  is  the  highest  liberty  which  either  interest  can  \ 

S  enjoy  consistently  with  their  coherence  in  society.     In  such  a  case,   ( 

the  liberty  incident  to  isolation  is  abridged,  as  a  result  of  the  nature  i 


ADDRESS.  11 


)  of  the  society — not  of  the  political  institutions  of  that  society.  It  is 
unquestionably  true,  that  the  amount  of  civil  liberty  in  any  one 
society  may  differ  from  that  in  another;  even  where  in  each  the 
highest  degree  of  liberty  has  been  attained  for  the  individuals  com- 
prising it,  which  is  possible.  Relatively,  the  degrees  of  liberty  thus 
attained  will  differ,  aye,  must  differ ;  but  if  they  do,  it  will  be  as  the 
necessity  of  their  social  condition,  and  not  because  civil  liberty  in 
either  is  less  than  is  practicable.  So  far  is  this  true,  that  it  is  possible 
for  the  citizens  of  each  country  in  the  world  to  be  free  to  the  highest 
degree  which  its  social  condition  will  permit,  and  yet  the  citizen  of 
one  will  be  far  less  free  than  those  of  others.  In  other  words,  the 
maximum  of  liberty  possible  in  different  nations,  is  very  different,  as 
a  result  of  the  social  elements  composing  them. 

Let  it  not  be  forgotten  then,  that  the  perfection  of  liberty  in  any 
one  nation  may  be  far  below  what  it  is  in  every  other,  and  yet  may  be 
all  such  nation  may  be  susceptible  of,  or  entitled  to.  This  perfection 
of  free  institutions  in  each  is  not  attainable  by  reaching  after  that 
which  is  adapted  to  the  condition  of  some  other,  or  in  modelling  our 
own  after  theirs ;  but  in  striving  so  to  construct  the  elements  of  our 
own  system,  as  to  secure  the  highest  happiness  and  liberty  of  which 
the  members  of  our  own  society  are  capable. 

This  is  emphatically  the  study  of  the  true  constitutional  statesman. 
The  man  who  writes  constitutions  by  the  dozen,  and  keeps  them  on 
hand  for  use  or  distribution,  without  a  careful  investigation  of  the 
social  capacities  of  the  people  for  whom  they  are  designed — he  who 
guesses  that  our  institutions  would  be  admirably  suited  for  China  or 
Japan,  or  that  our  federative  system  of  republics  would  work  with 
facility  and  success  under  a  President  Roberts  upon  the  coast  of 
Africa,  is  a  dangerous  empiric — a  mere  pretender,  whose  reward 
should  be  fixed  in  a  perpetual  banishment  from  the  counsels  of  a  wise 
people,  and  in  the  solitude  of  an  asylum  for  political  lunatics. 

I  think,  that  in  this  view  is  involved  the  perfect  vindication  of  that 
great  Southern  institution  which  has  been  the  subject  of  villification 
by  our  enemies,  and  of  some  conscientious  distrust  on  the  part  of  a 
number  of  our  best  citizens.  Standing  upon  the  basis  of  the  purest 
Republicanism,  I  feel  that  we  may  as  vehemently  repel  the  former  as 


ADDRESS 


we  may  honestly  and  kindly  dispel  the  latter.  Republican  principle 
as  truly  rejects  the  schemes  of  the  abolitionist,  as  it  condemns  (as 
already  shown)  the  odious  ideas  of  the  agrarian  and  the  socialist. 
They  are  all  hatched  in  the  same  nest  of  fraud  and  spoliation  with 
Parisian  Jacobinism.     They  have  no  breath,  but  discord;  no  words, 

)  but  curses ;  no  food,  no  drink,  but  human  misery ;  no  charity,  but 
that  of  demons;  no  love,  but  visits  upon  its  object  a  doom  more 
terrible  than  its  hate  can  inflict  on  its  victim ;  no  faith,  but  in  a 
breach  of  faith ;  no  belief,  but  in  the  dogmas  of  their  own  creed ;  no 
morality,  but  murder,  treason,  theft,  and  perjury,  even  under  senato- 
rial robes;  no  religion,  but  atheism ;  no  God,  but  themselves!  For,  ) 
let  it  be  ever  remembered,  the  prototype  of  infidel,  atheistic  abolition 

(  here,  is  to  be  found  in   that  Eeign   of  Terror,  when  Jacobin  France 
illustrated  the  doctrines  of  its  kindred  socialistic  creed,  in  the  blood- 
flowing  streets  of  her  capital,  and  in  the  worship  of  the  goddess  of  its 
own  reason,  while  trampling  under  its  feet  the  word  of  God.     Like  |> 
causes  must  produce  results  so  entirely  similar.  ( 

It  is  true  that  human  reason  may  suggest  that  the  Saxon  and  ) 

African  should  never  have  been  united ;  and   abolition  plants  itself  > 

(  upon  this  supposed  impregnable  suggestion.     But  what  is  the  answer  ( 
■  with  which  every  candid  enquirer  cannot  fail  to  be  impressed  ?    How- 

ever  wise  may  be  the  human  suggestion,  the  Divine  Wisdom  has  ) 

decided  that  it  was  best  they  should  be  united,  and,  as  I  believe,  for  j 

centuries    to    come — and   as    master    and    slave.      Unless,   therefore,  ? 

humanity  is  modestly  determined  to  sit  as  a  high  court  of  errors,  and  ) 

solemnly  to  reverse  the  decree  of  Divinity,  it  may  be  considered  use-  \ 

less  further  "to  justify  the  ways  of  God  to  man,"  in  the  mysterious  ( 

union  of  the  two  races  upon  the  virgin  continent  of  our  western  world,  t 

If  I  am  asked,  Was  it  originally  right  to  bring  the  African  here  ?  | 

my  answer  is  brief,  but  to  my  mind  conclusive.     It  is  not  a  question  ) 

for  your  conscience  or  mine.  We  did  not  bring  them  here.  If  it  ] 
was  wrong,  the  responsibility  of  the  act  was  assumed  by  a  generation 
which  once  lived,  and,  having  passed  away,  has  met  it  long  ago,  at  a 
higher  than  human  tribunal.  The  act  of  bringing  has  left  no  load 
of  responsibility  upon  the  souls  of  this  generation.  "  The  fathers  have 
eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  children's  teeth  have  not  been  set  on  edge." 


ADDRESS.  13 


I  read  in  that  wonderful  Providence  by  which  three  millions  of  a 
stranger  race  are  immovably  affixed  to  our  continent,  a  noble  end, 
which  their  union  with  the  Anglo-American  is  to  subserve  in  the 
,  world's  future  destiny,  and  a  decree  of  punishment  to  a  guilty  race, 
which,  in  its  execution  of  banishment  from  their  native  land,  will  yet 
be  freighted  with  blessings  to  them  and  their  posterity.  We  may  say 
in  great  humility,  that  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  has  been  "  faithful  in  a 
very  little."  The  gifts  of  Providence  strewn  in  profusion  around 
them  have  to  some  extent  been  improved ;  the  five  talents  conferred 
have  been  productive  of  five  talents  more.  And  while  we  thus  grate- 
fully assume  that  we  have  been  fruitful  in  some  good,  can  we  fail  to 
see  in  the  unhappy  and  degraded  race  of  Africa,  the  story  of  him  "  who 
hid  his  talent  in  the  earth" — who,  productive  only  in  a  deeper  and 
deeper  debasement  of  his  powers,  and  prostituting  them  only  to  the 
purposes  of  bestiality,  had  its  solemn  doom  pronounced  in  the  sen- 
tence, "  Take,  therefore,  the  talent  from  him,  and  give  it  unto  him 
which  hath  the  ten"  ?  And  can  we  refuse  to  see,  that  if  we  would 
meet  the  grand  designs  of  Providence  in  this  additional  imposition  of 
responsibility,  and  this  gift  for  larger  development,  we  must  do  so  by 
boldly  girding  up  our  loins  to  the  enterprise,  and  improving  it  to  the 
advancement  of  our  own  destiny  in  that  onward  march,  as  we  trust, 
towards  the  attainment  of  the  highest  dignity  of  which  our  fallen 
nature  is  susceptible  ? 

Casting  away,  then,  the  timidity  of  a  squeamish  sensibility,  and 
applying  the  true  principle  of  Republicanism  already  announced,  to 
this  deeply  vital  cpiestion,  let  me  ask,  in  order  to  answer,  What  is  our 
duty  ?  Clearly  not  to  attempt  to  meet  the  responsibilities  of  others  ; 
nor  to  pry  into  the  decrees  of  Providence ;  nor  to  encpiire  how  we 
may  undo  what  they  have  already  accomplished ;  nor  to  imagine  how 
much  better  things  would  have  been  managed,  had  we  only  lived  at  a 
former  day,  and  especially,  had  we  been  at  the  helm  of  dominion  in 
the  affairs  of  men.  None  of  these  !  they  are  the  idle  dreams  of  the 
sentimentalist,  of  the  order  of  the  "  Do  Nothings,"  which  must  be 
discarded  by  the  men  of  this  practical  "Do  Something"  age.  We 
must  simply  meet  our  responsibility,  and,  taking  things  as  they  are, 
do  what  is  best  in  the  circumstances  in  which  we  are  placed.  This  is 
our  duty ;  and  we  must  perform  it. 


14  ADDRESS 

But  ^Republicanism   (the  false)   proposes  the  equality  of  the  two 
races.     Good  sense  and  universal  experience  teaches,  there  can  be  no 
equality  politically,  where   social  communion   cannot  exist.     History 
affords  no  instance  in  which  two  races,  diverse  in  particulars  which 
can  never  be  erased  or  forgotten,  have  ever  existed  as  co-equal  ele- 
ments in  any  people.     Those  which  present  a  supposed  analogy  to 
that   proposed,  have  been   productive   of  convulsions,  continuing  for 
centuries,  and  only  ceasing  when  a  social  amalgamation,  which  with 
them   was  possible,  destroyed  their  political  diversity  and   conflict. 
But  in  these  cases,  the  diversity  of  race  was  more  imaginary  than 
(  real — more  the  result  of  difference  of  habits,  and  of  natural  origin, 
j  than   of  inherent   and  permanent  characteristics.     No   case   can   be 
1  cited,  where  political  equality  has   co-existed  with   an   unchangeable 
i  diversity  in  individual  peculiarities ;  a  diversity,  not  resulting  from 
a  difference  in  mental  and  moral  culture  alone,  but  stamped  upon,  and 
]  inherent  in,  the  very  physical  nature  and  appearance  of  the  two  races 
■  conjoined,  palpable  to  the  sense,  and  transmissible  forever. 

Need  I  add,  that  this  social  amalgamation  between  the  Saxon  and 
\  African  is  abhorrent  to  every  sentiment  of  our  natures  ?  a  sentiment, 
',  which  time  nor  habit  can  ever  eradicate,  unless  by  substituting  the 
I  base  quality  of  the  inferior  for  the  noble  sensibility  of  the  superior 
(  race.     But  if  it  could  be  removed,  a  higher  law — the  law  of  God — 
forbids  it.     It  is  written  upon  the  constitution  of  the  two  races,  in 
characters  not  to  be  misunderstood,  and   declares   in   plain  and  em- 
phatic language,  "  Those  whom  God  has  put  asunder,  let  not  man 
join  together." 

It  is  therefore  clear,  that  our  duty  forbids  equality  in  social  con- 
dition of  the  two  races,  whose  destiny  it  is  our  responsibility  to 
direct ;  and  that  being  forbidden,  their  political  equality,  as  I  have 
shewn,  becomes  wholly  impossible.  What  then  results  ?  The  ine- 
quality, social  and  political,  of  the  Saxon  and  African,  becomes  our 
solemn  duty;  a  permanent  inequality,  fixed  by  a  decree  irreversible. 
It  is  obvious,  further,  that  it  cannot  be  the  duty  of  the  superior 
race  to  assume  the  position  of  subordination,  and  to  surrender  its  real 
supremacy  to  that  inferior,  whose  "hidden  talent"  has  been  entrusted 
to  its  keeping.     For,  besides,  that  the  supposed  evil  of  inequality 


ADDRESS.  15 

would  not  be  removed  by  such  a  reversal  of  positions,  a  responsibility 
imposed  must  be  met;  and  a  neglect  of  duty  enjoined  is  as  culpable 
as  the  commission  of  wrong.  It  then  follows,  as  an  inevitable  con- 
clusion, that  the  duty  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  in  the  South  is  so  to 
organize  the  elements  of  which  our  Southern  Society  is  composed,  as, 
by  retaining  the  perpetual  supremacy  of  the  master  race  and  the  like 
subordination  of  the  African,  to  attain  the  highest  happiness  of  which 
each  is  susceptible,  in  the  relative  positions  which  are  assigned  to 
them  by  the  decree  of  Providence.  This  is  the  republican  duty  of 
the  Saxon  race.  True  Republicanism,  where  the  two  races  exist,  can 
only  prevail  where  such  an  organization  obtains. 

For  I  put  it  to  any  candid  man,  who  hears  me,  or  who  will  exam- 
ine this  question  as  he  should,  whether  the  very  best  relation  for  the 
two  races,  if  they  must  live  together,  be  not  that  of  master  and 
slave  ?  TVith  our  own  experience  of  the  relation  between  the  white 
and  the  free  negro  population — and  more  than  that,  with  the  expe- 
rience of  the  free  States  expressed  in  many  of  their  new  constitu- 
tions— can  any  man  hesitate  to  say,  that,  as  the  two  races  exist  in  the 
South,  the  most  favorable  condition  for  the  African  is  slavery,  and 
the  only  condition  for  the  Saxon,  consistent  with  his  progress  or  even 
existence,  is  that  of  being  the  director  of  the  physical  and  moral 
energies  of  a  race  whose  capacity  for  self-control,  centuries  in  the 
past  and  the  experience  of  the  present  amply  demonstrate  ? 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  vindicate  further  this  important  relation  in 
the  Southern  States.  This  digression  from  the  general  purpose  of 
my  address  was  merely  intended  as  a  defence  of  the  institution  of 
Slavery  from  the  charge  of  being  anti-Republican ;  and  to  show  that, 
upon  the  principle  already  established,  and  with  the  two  races  co- 
existent in  our  Southern  society,  Republicanism  demands  the  main- 
tenance of  that  institution,  as  best  adapted  to  the  happiness  and  well- 
being  of  the  subject  race ;  and  as  alone  consistent  with  the  progress 
and  civilization  of  that  to  which  Providence  has  awarded  the  su- 
premacy. 

Yet  I  should  do  injustice  to  myself  and  to  our  assailed  position 
upon  this  question,  if  I  did  not  add,  that  it  is  clear  to  my  mind, 
while  the  servitude  of  the  African  places  him  in  a  higher  sphere  than 


he  has  ever  elsewhere  attained ;  while  he  is  a  better  man  and  more 
civilized  than  he  was  in  his  native  wilds,  or  can  be  in  the  wicked  pur- 
lieus of  the  free  cities  of  the  Xorth ;  the  institution  of  Slavery  has 
given  to  the  white  man  more  real  freedom,  has  developed  in  him  to  a 
higher  degree  his  mental  and  moral  capacities,  and  has  made  him  the 
noblest  specimen  of  the  American  Republican.  The  negro  slave  is  a 
higher  being  than  the  negro  freeman.  The  Saxon  freeman  of  the 
slaveholding  State  has  a  more  actual  and  a  truer  liberty  than  those  of 
the  non-slaveholding.  Thus  it  is  that  the  free  labor  democracies  de- 
press the  high  and  the  low,  while  the  slave  labor  democracies  elevate 
both.     The  former  level  downwards,  the  latter  upwards. 

I  trust  I  have  thus  developed  the  true  idea  of  Republicanism; 
what  I  believe  to  have  been  essentially  the  Virginian,  the  American 
idea.  It  may  be  summed  up  thus-:  Each  man,  with  rights  distinct 
from  those  of  every  other,  enters  or  adheres  to  the  social  organiza- 
tion to  secure  them.  He  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  party  to  the  social 
compact;  and  his  object  in  becoming  such  is  the  assurance  of  his 
own  rights ;  not  claiming  to  participate  in  the  rights  of  others,  nor 
permitting  others  to  exact  a  share  in  his  own.  These  rights,  attach- 
ing to  him  as  a  social,  not  as  an  isolated  being,  are  not  absolute,  but 
are  qualified  by  the  rights  of  others,  and  are  limited  in  their  nature, 
as  the  necessary  consequence  of  association,  but  not  thereby  losing 
their  distinctness.  The  object  of  government  should  be  to  secure 
these  separate  rights  to  each  individual,  to  the  full  extent  which  his 
social  relations  entitle  him  to  demand. 

Having  thus  ascertained  the  legitimate  purpose  of  all  government, 

by  regarding  the  motive  to  social  cohesion,  it  becomes  proper  to  en- 

quire  how  this  purpose  can  be  best  carried  out,  and  the  means  most  ( 

appropriate  for  doing  so. 

One   o-eneral  view  will  be  suggested  by  the  discussion  alreadv  in-   > 

) 
dulled :  that,  as  fhe  purpose  of  all  government  is  the  assurance  of  ) 

individual  rights,  its  powers  will  be  best  administered  when  wielded 

by  those   for  whose  security  it   is  to  operate.     In  other  words,  in   so 

far  as  the  action  of  government  can  be  brought  under  the  control  of 

the  individuals  of  society,  it  will  the  most  surely  attain  the  object  of 

its  institution. 


ADDRESS.  17 


This  general  proposition  would  indicate  that  to  he  the  best  gov- 
ernment which  is  most  under  the  control  of  the  people,  or  in  common 
phrase,  which  is  Democratic. 

But  if  we  look  at  the  proposition  more  closely,  we  will  find  it  in- 
volves a  higher  and  more  important  truth.  To  place  the  government 
under  the  control  of  all,  may  he  very  important;  but  it  is  more  im- 
portant that  it  should  be  controlled  by  all,  because  it  is  thus  subjected 
to  the  control  of  each.  We  must  remember  that  each  man's  rights 
are  to  be  assured,  not  the  rights  of  a  mass  of  men.  For  this,  he  joins 
the  social  pact ;  for  this,  he  constructs  government ;  for  this,  he  de- 
sires a  voice  in  its  action.  But  if  his  lone  voice  be  drowned  in  the 
shout  of  the  popular  "All;"  if  bis  rights,  though  differing  from 
those  of  all  others,  should  by  that  shout  be  condemned  to  outrage 
and  violation,  the  purpose  for  which  he  contracted  the  social  bond  is 
defeated,  and  the  mastery  of  the  government  by  the  whole  will  not 
only  be  of  no  advantage  to  him,  but  become  a  ready  means  for  his 
oppression. 

We  thus  see  the  government  must  be,  as  to  its  action  upon  the 
rights  of  each,  under  the  control  of  each,  in  order  best  to  carry  out 
its  legitimate  end;  otherwise,  the  rights  of  each  and  all  would  be 
subjected  to  the  control  of  those  whose  interest  might  lead  them  to 
impair  or  destroy  them. 

But  such  a  government,  it  may  be  said,  would  be  impracticable, 
and  is  therefore  out  of  the  question.  The  objection  is  not  without 
force;  and  I  will  therefore  show  how  the  principle  just  announced 
yields  to  the  modification  demanded,  without  any  essential  impair- 
ment of  its  value. 

It  will  be  observed,  the  power  of  each  person  in  the  contro*I  of  the 
government  involved  in  the  proposition  just  stated,  is  not  a  power  in 
each  to  be  exerted  over  others,  but  is  only  to  be  exerted  defensively 
1  for  the  protection  of  rights  threatened  to  be  invaded  by  others.  It  is 
not  an  active,  but  a  resistive  force.  It  does  not  involve  the  justly 
detested  heresy  of  an  oligarchy,  but  is  under  another  form  of  expres- 
sion, the  doctrine  of  the  veto  or  negative  power. 

If,  now,  we  regard  society  as  made  up  of  distinct  classes,  the  inter-- 
est  of  each  member  of  the  class  being  that  of  every  other,  each  class 
would  present  a  unit  of  interest,  and  the   voice  of  that  class  would 


18  ADDRESS 

fairly  represent  the  voice  of  each  of  the  persons  composing  it.  And 
if  to  each  class  is  given  the  negative  power  contended  for,  it  -will  an- 
swer every  essential  purpose  of  giving  it  to  each  of  its  members.  By 
this  means,  the  value  of  a  negative  power  is  not  materially  impaired, 
while  its  practicability  is  secured. 

Xow,  it  is  true,  that  the  difficulty  lies  in  the  reduction  of  this  great 
principle  to  practice.  So  diverse  and  intricate  are  the  interests  of 
society;  so  strangely  do  the  co-incidences  in  interest  of  men  to-day 
change  to-morrow ;  so  unseen  are  the  various  relations  which  the 
classes  of  society  will  assume  in  the  future,  that  the  perfection  of 
this  principle  in  practice  has  never  yet  been  seen.  And  "yet  to  dis- 
card it,  because  we  cannot  perfect  it,  would  be  as  unwise  and  foolish 
as  it  would  be  fraught  with  disaster  and  ruin.  That  man  who  ex- 
pects perfection  in  human  institutions,  is  unfit  for  all  the  practical 
purposes  of  life.  ^Ve  must  deal  with  things  as  they  are,  not  as  we  may 
fancifully  conjecture  they  ought  to  have  been.  If  we  cannot  reach 
truth,  we  must  approximate  it.  How,  we  shall  proceed  to  show. 
If  we  bear  in  mind,  that  the  object  in  view  is  to  secure  power  to 
the  individual,  as  a  means  of  protecting  his  rights  from  the  invasion 
of  others,  either  through  the  action  of  the  Government  or  otherwise, 
the  views  I  shall  now  present  will  be  obvious. 

The  first  consideration  with  the  individual  would  be,  of  course,  to 
retain  as  much  power  over  his  own  action,  and  to  give  as  little  to  the 
Government,  as  possible.     Thus  the  primary   security   to  individual 
liberty  is  to  be  found  in  a   strict   and  rigid   limitation  upon  govern- 
mental power,  and  in  the  reservation  of  as  much  as  possible  to  the 
man.     And  as  his  motive  in  entering  into  the   social  compact  is  the 
security  of  his  rights  from  the  invasion  of  others,  it  is  clear,  that  the 
more  strictly  the  action  of  society  is  confined  to  the  mere  protection 
of  personal  rights,  and  the  less  interference  with  them  it  indulges, 
the  more  nearly  will  the  purpose  of  its  institution  be  realized,  and 
)  the  more  perfect  will  be  the  civil  liberty  of  the  individual. 
j       Another  most  important  assurance  to  personal  liberty  and  against 
( governmental  power,  is  the  American  invention  of  written  constitu- 
(  tions.     By  this  means,  the  discretion  of  government  is  much  abridged, 
)  and  its  action  limited  by  boundaries   prescribed  by  the  popular  will. 


ADDRESS.  19 

Nor  is  there  reason  to  apprehend  the  same  danger  to  liberty  from  the 
provisions  of  a  constitution,  as  from  the  ordinary  acts  of  legislation. 
For  there  is  this  striking  difference  between  them.  The  constitution 
is  a,  general  rule,  permanent  and  fixed ;  while  the  law  is  a  special 
act,  designed  to  meet  a  temporary  emergency,  or  perhaps  to  gratify  a 
transient  ebullition  of  tyrannical  passion.  The  one  cannot  be  repealed 
except  by  extraordinary  measures ;  the  other  may  be  repealed  at  once. 
Thus  the  very  people  who  might  not  hesitate  to  commit  a  wrong 
under  a  transient  impulse,  would  shrink  from  giving  to  government, 
by  a  constitutional  provision,  a  permanent  and  abiding  authority  to 
deal  tyranny  to  whomsoever  it  should  list. 

Another  security  is  to  be  found  in  that  political  axiom  in  our  day, 
by  which  the  three  modes  in  which  power  may  be  exercised,  are  con- 
fided to  hands  entirely  separate  and  distinct.  It  is  conceded,  that  the 
most  unmitigated  tyranny  would  result  from  the  union  in  the  same 
hands  of  legislative,  executive  and  judicial  functions;  while  in  their 
separation,  thus  affording  to  the  citizen  the  chance  of  a  veto  by  some 
one  of  them  upon  the  despotic  purposes  of  the  others,  is  provided  an 
additional  assurance  to  his  rights  under  a  written  constitution. 

But  there  is  one  other  most  important  view,  which  I  cannot  over- 
look. While  judicial  power  initiates  no  action  against  a  citizen,  and 
executive  authority  is  merely  ministerial,  the  legislative  department 
affords  the  widest  scope  to  the  invasion  of  private  right.  It  is  there- 
fore to  the  organization  of  this  we  should  look  with  anxious  and 
watchful  vigilance. 

According  to  the  view  already  presented,  it  is  here  that  we  should 
secure  the  power  of  the  veto  or  negative  to  the  classes  of  the  com- 
munity, those  imits  of  interest  composing  the  body  politic.  This  can 
only  be  done  by  taking  the  best  united  and  most  prominent  interests 
of  society,  as  the  bases  of  political  authority,  and  so  arranging  power  < 
between  them,  that  neither  can  injure  the  other  without  its  assent. 
The  larger  the  basis  that  can  be  given  by  this  means  to  the  popular 
will — that  is,  the  greater  the  majority  of  the  people  requisite  to  the 
action  of  the  government,  and  the  smaller  the  minority  which  is 
necessary  to  defeat  it — the  higher  will  be  the  assurance  to  the  rights 
of  the  citizen,  because  the  greater  will  be  the  possibility,  that  by  his 


own  individual  action  he  may  defeat  their  contemplated  invasion  by 
the  Government. 

I  need  scarcely  say,  that  this  is  the  principle  of  "  concurrent  ma- 
jorities," as  it  has  been  most  happily  designated  by  the  greatest 
political  thinker  of  our  country.  The  safety  of  each  interest  is 
assured,  because  its  assent  is  necessary  to  action.  This  is  the  con- 
summation of  political  theories;  and  if  it  could  be  perfected  in 
practice,  it  would  make  man's  happiness  and  security  no  longer  the 
subject  of  another's  will,  but  controllable  only  by  himself,  and  those 
whose  interests  are  identical  with  his  own.  This  would  indeed  realize 
the  noble  idea  of  self-government.  His  rights  are  safe  until  invaded 
by  himself.  He  is  therefore  self-regulated,  self-governed.  He  is  a 
real  freeman. 

I  cannot  but  call  your  attention,  for  a  moment,  to  the  contrast  be- 
tween this  system  of  government  and  that  which  boasts  the  same 
title;  a  government  of  a  mere  numerical  majority.  How  can  the 
minority,  whose  rights  are  under  the  absolute  control  of  a  majority, 
with  no  interest  in  common  with  them  ;  who  are  governed  by  King 
Numbers  with  as  despotic  power  as  the  Turk  by  his  Sultan,  or  the 
Kusse  by  the  Czar;  how  can  this  minority  be  said  to  be  self-governed? 
Xot  consulted,  except  to  be  over-ruled ;  with  no  rights  but  such  as 
the  majority  may  accord  to  them;  with  no  will,  except  to  obey,  they 
are  summoned  to  sing  hosannas  to  the  beauties  of  a  system  of  self- 
government,  and  are  deluded  into  the  belief  that  they  are  free,  when 
free  to  do  nothing  but  the  bidding  of  others  ! 

That  my  meaning  may  not  fail  to  be  comprehended,  permit  me  to 
illustrate  this  view  by  our  own  splendid  example. 

Our  system  is  the  most  compound  in  its  nature,  as  in  its  origin, 
which  has  ever  existed.  TTe  have  not  only  written  constitutions 
ordaining  that  entire  distinctness  of  departments  already  referred  to, 
but  we  have  two  distinct  governments,  each  of  which  is  broken  into 
three  sub-divisions.  Thus,  in  the  mutual  checking  of  the  several 
departments  of  each  government,  the  citizen  has  a  grand  security  for 
his  liberty  and  his  rights;  and  in  the  rival  jealousy  of  the  one  gov- 
ernment to  the  other,  he  has  more  than  once  found  an  ample  shield 
for  his  protection.     The  strictly  limited  powers  of  the  Federal  Legis- 


ts 


ADDRESS.  21    ( 


lature  are  further  curbed  by  an  independent  judiciary;  the  ten- 
dency of  the  executive  to  enlarge  its  authority  is  restrained  by  the 
guardians  of  popular  liberty  in  the  legislative  branch ;  and  the  ever 
centralizing  nature  of  an  overshadowing  Federal  Government,  is  held 
in  check  by  the  jealous  home  governments  of  the  States. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  veto  principle  is  still  more  intimately 
interwoven  in  the  legislative  branch  of  our  system.  A  brief  view  of 
this  will  illustrate  my  subject  more  strikingly. 
)  In  the  lower  house  of  Congress,  the  States  are  represented,  but 
!  according  to  numerical  strength.  In  the  Senate,  they  are'  represented 
according  to  their  equi-sovereignty.  In  the  Executive,  who,  as  to  his 
negative  or  veto  power,  is  properly  a  branch  of  the  Legislature,  the 
States  are  represented  according  to  the  equi-sovereign  and  numerical 
elements  in  combination.  Thus,  in  these  several  modes  in  which  the 
States  express  their  law-making  will,  there  must  be  a  concurrence  of 
all,  before  any  law  can  be  made  to  operate  upon  any  citizen  of  any 
one  of  them;  and  the  dissent  of  either  defeats  the  action  of  the 
others.  Thus,  in  the  increased  chances  of  non-action,  the  danger  to 
liberty  from  over  action  is  avoided,  and  the  rights  of  the  citizen  are 
secured,  because  let  alone.  For  I  may  safely  say,  in  99  cases  in  100, 
governmental  action  is  more  dangerous  to  personal  rights  than  non- 
action. 

It  is  in  this  veto  or  negative  power  of  each  branch  of  this  com- 
pound system,  each  a  breakwater  to  the  flood-tide  of  despotism,  that 
the  best  security  of  the  citizen  can  be  found ;  and  so  long  as  the 
independence  of  each  is  assured  to  it  against  the  influence  of  the 
others,  so  long  may  our  liberties  be  perpetuated.  The  danger  is  in 
the  tendency  of  some  one  branch  to  a  monopoly  of  power  in  itself; 
and  in  the  attempt,  always  to  be  resisted,  to  impair  the  efficacy  of  the 
veto  principle  in  any  of  the  various  forms  under  which  it  exists  in  our 
system.  There  is  no  substantial  danger,  and  can  be  none,  in  the  non- 
action of  government.  The  danger  is  in  its  over-action  ;  a  danger 
avoided  by  the  veto.  The  veto,  let  it  be  ever  remembered,  can  only 
prevent  action  ;  it  can  never  consummate  it.  Its  efficiency  is  merely 
negative ;  never  positive.  It  is  a  shield  against  power ;  it  is  never  the 
sword  of  power. 


ADDRESS 


This  is  the  theory  of  our  system.  It  is  sad  to  think  how  little, 
even  in  the  best  arranged  human  institutions,  there  is  to  assure  us  of 
our  rights,  or  to  ensure  us  against  wrong. 

For  reasons  which  it  would  too  much  prolong  this  address  to  ex- 
plain, in  my  own  judgment,  there  has  been  over-action  in  our  entire 
system,  but  a  fatal  tendency  to  it  in  our  Federal  Government.  No 
man  can  read  the  Constitution,  and  the  history  of  its  formation — the 
anxious  attempts  to  guard  against  an  over  exercise  of  power — and 
then  turn  to  the  labors  of  each  term  of  our  Federal  Legislature, 
without  feeling,  deeply  feeling,  that  it  has  long  since  broken  through 
the  barriers  which  parchments  had  erected,  and  limited  its  action  only 
by  its  illimitable  discretion. 

I  say  in  grave  seriousness,  young  gentlemen,  the  fault  is  not  in  our 
stars,  but  in  ourselves,  that  this  is  so.  We  have  not  held  to  the  prin- 
ciples which  I  have  attempted  to  develope.  We  have  looked  too 
much  to  the  "nation"- — as  we  term  it,  with  neither  constitution  nor 
histoiy  to  justify  the  term — and  too  little  to  the  rights  of  the  citizen. 
His  rights  are  the  motive  to  all  this  intricate  and  theoretically  admi- 
rable— I  had  almost  said,  perfect  arrangement  of  elements  in  our 
system.  But  in  our  admiration  of  the  means,  we  have  too  much  for- 
gotten the  end. 

Permit  me  to  re-construct  the  views  thus  imperfectly  analyzed,  in 
order  to  show  the  remedy,  if  there  be  one.  I  have  endeavored  to 
show,  that  the  best  government  would  be  where  the  power  to  forbid 
its  action  was  reserved  to  every  man.  But  as  such  a  system  would 
be  impracticable,  the  approximation  to  it  is  in  the  reservation  of  the 
veto  power,  as  far  as  is  possible,  to  every  class,  viewing  each  as  a 
unit,  and  as  representing  fairly  in  the  whole,  the  views  of  each  man 
belonging  to  it. 

In  attempting  to  decompose  society  into  its  component  interests, 
though  we  may  fail  in  doing  so  perfectly,  it  is  obvious  that  the  nearer 
we  bring  the  government,  which  is  to  operate  upon  the  individual, 
within  the  reach  of  his  control,  the  more  secure  we  make  his  rights 
against  any  infringement  by  it.  And  as  between  two  governments 
who  are  to  legislate  for  him,  power  is  safest  for  him  in  the  hands  of 
that  one  over  which  he  has  the  greatest  influence ;  because,  to  the 


ADDRESS.  23 


extent  of  his  greater  influence,  it  is  his  own  control  of  himself;  it  is 
self-government,  which  is  admitted  to  he  the  safest  for  him.  And  it 
is  further  obvious  from  the  course  of  reasoning  already  adopted,  that 
this  will  he  proportionally  more  true,  as  the  government  over  which 
he  has  most  influence,  is  controlled  by  others  whose  interests  are 
similar  to  his  own. 

These  obvious  principles  indicate  this  inevitable  conclusion.  As 
each  citizen  of  a  State  has  a  proportionably  larger  influence  over  its 
government  than  he  has  over  the  Federal  Government,  and  as  his 
interests  and  those  of  the  other  citizens  of  the  State  are  more  homo- 
geneous, than  are  his  and  those  of  citizens  of  all  the  other  States,  it 
follows  that  power,  as  far  as  the  rights  of  each  citizen  are  involved, 
is  safer  in  the  State  than  it  can  be  in  the  Federal  Government.  The 
mass  of  power,  therefore,  should  remain  in  the  State  Government, 
and  only  so  much,  and  not  one  jot  or  tittle  more,  as  is  absolutely 
necessary  for  the  purposes  of  its  creation,  should  be  permitted  in  the 
Federal  Government. 

Looking,  then,  to  the  object  in  view  in  the  establishment  of  gov- 
ernment, the  security  of  the  rights  of  the  citizen,  I  am  an  earnest 
and  jealous  advocate  of  the  power  of  the  States,  because  I  am  a 
zealous  friend  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  man.  As  man,  a  sovereign, 
formed  the  social  compact  upon  which  the  State  Government  rests,  so 
the  State,  a  sovereign,  formed  the  larger  social  compact  of  our  Federal 
Union,  upon  which  rests  its  now  wide-reaching  government.  And 
while,  as  a  man,  I  jealously  watch  the  tendency  of  the  one  to  encroach 
upon  my  individual  sovereignty,  as  a  citizen  of  Virginia  I  desire  that 
she  should  guard  her  sovereignty  from  the  advances  of  Federal  usurp- 
ation, which  in  their  consequences  must  further  abridge  my  personal 
rights  and  liberty. 

And  thus  it  is,  gentlemen,  that  at  last  these  splendid  things,  called 
governments,  claiming  power  as  their  prerogative,  and  trampling  upon 
private  rights  as  if  they  belonged  to  them,  and  granting  privileges  as 
if  they  were  the  vicegerents  of  Providence,  are  but  the  creatures  of 
your  power  and  mine ;  they  live  at  our  bidding,  and  die  at  our  will. 
For  by  the  voice  of  men  they  are  changed ;  by  the  act  of  expatri- 
ation their  power  over  the  man  ceases ;  and  by  revolution  they  are 
overthrown. 


24  A  D  D  B  E  S 

By  enlarging  the  sphere  of  our  view,  we  find  the  analogy  in  our 
Federal  Union.  Created  by  the  fiat  of  each  State  for  itself,  it  dies  at  ' 
its  Trill.  The  expatriation  of  the  citizen  is  the  secession  of  the  State. 
And  thus,  when  either  Government,  in  violation  of  the  end  of  its 
being,  makes  itself  the  instrument  of  wrong,  the  citizen  in  the  one 
case,  and  the  State  in  the  other,  by  the  exercise  of  that  high  negative 
or  veto  authority  of  which  I  have  spoken,  interposes  the  shield  of 
individual  or  State  sovereignty,  for  the  security  of  the  rights  of  the 
man  from  the  usurpation  of  the  Government. 

If  the  theory  of  our  system  is  to  be  realized  in  its  practical  opera- 
tion, it  must  be  by  a  return  to  the  principles  which  I  have  thus 
imperfectly  sketched.  The  glory  of  the  Government  must  consist  in  ' 
its  rigid  care  of  the  rights  of  its  citizens.  The  splendors  of  its  con- 
quests— the  munificence  of  its  charities — the  extensiveness  of  its 
donations — the  largeness  of  its  philanthropy — the  brilliancy  of  its 
moral  reforms — the  magnificence  of  its  improvements,  manifesting 
themselves  in  intrusive  regulations  of  private  interests,  and  injurious 
diversions  of  the  industry  of  the  country  to  suit  its  own  views  of  a 
well-doing  people  ;  these  are  all  beyond  the  scope  of  true  govern- 
mental powers,  and  dangerous  in  their  exercise  to  the  sphere  of  indi- 
vidual freedom.  They  have  made  the  human  race  cry  out  in  emphatic 
remonstrance,  "  The  world  is  governed  too  much."  Let  the  man 
alone  !  He  knows  his  interest  better  than  the  members  of  an  ephem- 
eral Legislature,  and  he  can  regulate  it  better.  As  to  moral  reform, 
the  man  has  a  conscience  to  accomplish  his  own — a  guide  which  has 
never  been  given  to  any  body  of  men.  The  division  of  responsibility 
in  the  latter  destroys  the  operation  of  the  individual  conscience. 

These  are  all  forms  of  the  evils  resulting  from  an  assumption  of 
larger  powers  by  Government,  than  according  to  its  nature  were  ever 
designed  to  be  vested  in  it.  Our  safety  is  in  the  limitation,  not  the 
enlargement  of  power.  In  our  federal  relations,  our  security  is  in 
realizing  the  historical  truth,  that  the  Union  sprang  from  the  will  of 
State  sovereigns;  that  it  is  the  subject  of  that  will;  in  restricting  the 
powers  of  its  government  within  the  narrow  boundaries  allotted  by 

5  the  Constitution,  and  in  keeping  it  there. 

I  cannot   close  this  address,  young  gentlemen,  without  a  word  to 

\  you  personally.     My  life-bark  has  too  lately  left  the  moorings  of  the 


ADDRESS 


haven  from  which  you  so  soon  sail,  for  my  sympathies  to  slumber  at 
the  prospect  of  your  future.  And  yet  my  career  has  been  long 
enough  to  enable  me,  and  with  your  leave,  to  induce  me  to  tender  to 
jou  the  suggestive  aid  of  my  short  experience,  and  my  hopes  for  your 
prosperous  voyage. 

I  presume  I  address  none  but  Southern  men.  I  may  address  you 
as  such,  for  there  is  no  more  sincere  defender  of  her  institutions  than 
I  am.  The  destiny  of  the  South  is  one  full  of  matter  for  concern 
and  reflection  for  her  sons.  Perhaps  there  has  been  no  clime  in  the 
world's  history,  whose  destiny  was  obviously  more  entirely  dependent 
\  upon  herself.  If  true  to  herself,  it  may  be  more  full  of  dignity,  more 
fraught  with  good  to  the  human  race,  than  that  of  any  people  in  the 
present  age.  But  if  untrue  to  her  own  highest  interests,  her  fate  may 
be  the  most  melancholy  in  the  records  of  history. 

When  I  regard  the  spectacle  of  six  millions  of  whites  wielding  the 
permanent  labor  of  three  millions  of  Africans,  in  the  cultivation  of 
those  articles  which  feed  and  clothe  the  world;  when  I  remember,  that 
their  labor  lifts  the  flood-gates  of  that  vast  manufacturing  horde,  in 
whose  employment  kingdoms  find  peace,  and  whose  discharge  involves 
carnage  and  revolution ;  when  I  remember,  that  when  the  century 
opened,  cotton  was  scarcely  known  as  an  export,  and  that  fifty  years 
hawtwitnessed  the  astounding  fact,  that  it  now  constitutes  more  than 
one-third  of  the  whole  export  of  the  country ;  when  I  see  every  turn 
in  the  wheel  of  the  world's  revolutions  increasing  the  demand  for  the 
products  of  slave  labor,  and  making,  in  the  order  of  Providence,  slavery 
a  perpetuity  in  the  Southern  States ;  when  I  see  the  Queen  of  the 
Antilles  stretching  out  her  jewelled  arms  to  hug  the  kindred  shores 
of  our  Florida;  when  I  look  upon  the  crumbling  edifice  of  Mexican 
civilization,  requiring  Southern  men  and  Southern  labor  to  re-con- 
struct it  under  Anglo-American  institutions — a  country  throwing  its 
long  arm  about  our  glorious  Gulf,  and  almost  touching  Cuba  with  its 
extremity ;  when  I  read  of  the  rich  clime  of  the  Amazon  valley, 
awaiting  the  labor  of  the  African  under  the  direction  of  the  intelli- 
gent Southerner,  for  its  full  development  in  those  fruits  which  will 
send  comfort  and  enjoyment  throughout  the  civilized  world;  when  I 
take   a  view  of  this  whitening  field  of  a  rich  harvest  to   Southern 


26  ADDRESS. 


enterprise,  I  cannot  despair  of  a  nobler  destiny  for  the  South,  under 
the  patriarchal  relation  of  slavery,  than  awaits  any  other  people.  It 
is  her's  to  develope  the  tropics  of  our  continent,  and  make  them  what 
Providence  designed  them  for,  the  comfort  and  happiness  of  the 
masses  of  the  world.  Destroy  her  institution,  and  you  strip  poverty 
of  its  clothing,  and  wealth  of  its  adorning.  At  her  bidding,  every 
spindle  in  England's  factories  would  cease ;  and  like  the  fabled  Ne- 
mesis, she  may  clip  the  wings  of  a  world's  commerce.  With  the 
Gulf  for  her  harbor,  the  waters  penetrating  the  valleys  of  the  Missis- 
sippi and  Amazon,  like  the  arteries  from  her  heart,  would  bear  back 
her  swift-flowing  wealth  to  the  remotest  parts  of  the  continent;  every 
sea's  canvass  would  be  filled  to  bear  the  products  of  her  labor,  and 
every  clime  be  refreshed  by  the  blessings  of  her  industry. 

And  who,  to  such  a  people,  shall  dictate  terms?  shall  tell  her  to  sur- 
render the  talent  which  God  has  given  her,  or  be  prostrated  to  the  bar- 
barism of  St.  Domingo  ?  I  say  it  boldly — she  holds  the  reins  of  em- 
pire in  Christendom,  by  means  of  this,  her  very  weakness.  If  she  be 
\  brave;  if  she  know  and  hold  her  vantage  ground;  if  she  speak  to 
her  foes  the  language  of  defiance,  not  of  fear,  she  must  triumph. 
What  should  make  her  craven  ?  Whence  does  she  trace  her  geneal- 
ogy ?  The  men  who  snatched  from  the  hands  of  insolent  power  the 
birth-right  of  our  liberties,  were  Southerners !  "  The  illustrious  South- 
erner" who  sleeps  on  the  banks  of  his  own  Potomac,  led  the  armies 
of  the  States  to  glory  and  to  victory.  A  Southern  voice,  whose  dead 
echoes  sleep  within  the  sound  of  my  own,  proclaimed  tyranny  to  be 
treason,  the  love  of  liberty  to  be  true  loyalty,  and  the  clank  of  Boston 
chains  the  summons  to  the  fight  for  independence.  A  Southern  hand 
penned  the  Declaration  which  announced  us  sovereign  States.  And 
a  Southern  State — why  should  I  not  name  her  ? — Virginia — may  God 
ever  bless  her  ! — sounded  in  a  despot's  ear  the  first  defiant  note  of 
the  first  free  Commonwealth  of  America  ! 

Our  origin,  our  history,  our  manifest  destiny,  summon  us  to  win 
a  name,  the   noblest  in   history. 

Much,  young  gentlemen,  depends  upon  you !     To  you  the  fate  of 
the  South  must  be  in  great  part  committed.     The  Wizard  of  the 


ADDRESS.  27 

North  makes  Scotland's  beauteous  Queen  appeal  to  her  young  page, 
when  flying  from  captivity  and  treason, 

"Oh!  Roland  Graeme!  Be  true  to  me! 
Many  have  been  false  to  me  !" 

So  speaks  the  South  to  each  one  of  you ! 

Personal  purity  of  character,  individual  integrity  of  purpose,  an 
independence  of  nature  to  scorn  the  possession  of  power,  where  it  is 
not  won,  and  cannot  be  held,  with  honor ;  a  fixed  determination  to  do 
right,  and  never  to  sacrifice  it  to  the  expedient ;  a  patriotism  which 
looks  to  the  country's  true  glory,  rather  than  to  the  accumulation  of 
her  wealth;  and  an  humble  and  Christian  dependence  upon  the 
guidance  of  Providence ;  these  are  the  elements  which  should  consti- 
tute the  Southern  statesman,  to  prepare  him  to  guide  her  in  the 
trying,  but  I  trust  glorious  future,  which  is  before  her. 

Never  sacrifice  truth  to  error,  even  to  gain  power.  Better  be  a 
martyr  to  truth  than  the  favorite  child  of  falsehood.  Let  it  be  your 
resolution,  neither  to  seek  power  by  unworthy  means,  nor  use  it  for 
unworthy  purposes.  Let  the  candidate  for  public  favor  be  enrobed  in 
the  spotless  garb,  the  toga  Candida  of  his  position ;  and  when  success 
crowns  his  efforts,  let  the  robes  of  office  be  soiled  with  none  of  the  filth 
of  the  arena  !  Be  assured,  its  ripening  fruit  waits  to  reward  the  votary 
of  virtue ;  and  the  ashes  of  disappointment  are  sure  to  defile  the  lips 
of  him,  who  seizes  the  bright  but  tainted  apple,  the  Dead  Sea  of  vice 
alone  can  bear.  Even  obscurity,  when  sweetened  by  the  conscious- 
ness of  right,  is  infinitely  higher  than  the  eminence  of  him,  whose 
shining  success  can  never  atone  for  the  wrong  done  in  its  attainment. 
For, 

"Not  all  that  heralds  rake  from  coffin'd  clay, 
Nor  florid  prose,  nor  honeyed  lies  of  rhyme, 
Can  blazon  evil  deeds,  or  consecrate  a  crime  !" 

I  wish  you,  young  gentlemen,  prosperity  in  the  career  which  lies 
before  you,  and  success  in  the  discharge  of  those  duties  which  may- 
be assigned  to  you ;  that  you  may  win  the  honor  of  the  good,  and 
merit  and  command  the  respect  even  of  the  bad ;  and  that  you  may 
be  enabled  so  to  use  the  talents  you  possess,  that  they  may  redound 
to  the  glory  and  advancement  of  our  country  ! 


